Illarion.org

Jealousy is a weakness that may spawn favouritism.

Anyhow, my point remains. Your argument merely tries to blow off my own by tangibly distracting from it--by pointing out the abovementioned as other types of rulebreakers.

Bravo.

It just goes to show how short-sighted and narrow-minded the even brightest and intelligent of this "community" can prove to occasionally be, especially when it comes to a computer game. On the internet. A massive multiplayer online role-playing game.

Edit: With an average of four players online, lately.
Edit2: And zero tolerance from the "community".

Moirear Sian wrote:Jealousy is a weakness that may spawn favouritism.

Please elaborate. You've talked about jealousy and favoritism quite a bit but never really got to any core of the argument. Are you saying that it is punished based on favoritism? I would say that it isn't punished at all. I would say that most cases where you could actually pinpoint a punishment, powergaming was only a dash of rulebreaking salt on the big pile of rulebreaking meat.

Am I jealous of the powergamer's power? Or are they jealous of where I got from pure roleplay? It goes both ways.

Anyhow, my point remains. Your argument merely tries to blow off my own by tangibly distracting from it--by pointing out the abovementioned as other types of rulebreakers.

Bravo.

Well. No. The last paragraph of my argument says that. It was more or less thinking out loud. If most of your examples break other rules, what are the rest doing? This is pointing out a weakness in an argument, and not stoking the flames. What you are doing above is merely giving up and being offended where no offense was meant.

It just goes to show how short-sighted and narrow-minded the even brightest and intelligent of this "community" can prove to occasionally be, especially when it comes to a computer game. On the internet. A massive multiplayer online role-playing game.

I never asked to be the brains of the operation. I only asked to play. If I became the representative of the intellect of Illarion, the tinfoil hat-wearing segment of our community is on to something; I'm joining them.

What must I do to get an unangry reply from you, Eric? Must I simply agree with you? Could I have a debate once instead of a shouting match? Anything other than a shouting match, please. From now on, let's solve all our disputes with pissing contests.

Edit: With an average of four players online, lately.
Edit2: And zero tolerance from the "community".

Yes. God forbid that we either: A: Have lives outside of this game. "On the internet. A massive multiplayer online roleplaying game." or B: debate on message boards.

I have some rhetorical questions for you, Eric. Think about them:

• Doesn't debating about how we honestly feel about game issues exactly fit into the playtester model that you advertise with signing your character name behind "PTO?"
• How does that change when I disagree with you?
• Could the last paragraph of my last post be, rather than an attempt to flame the POs, an attempt to add a physical reason and causality to an argument against powergaming?
• Knowing my opinions on good roleplaying and bad roleplaying being a matter of choice rather than habit, wouldn't this make my last paragraph sound much less harsh?
• My arguments on issues of roleplaying have remained unwavering, except in cases where I concede defeat to better logic and in cases where a new idea pops into my head. In each case where a new idea pops into my head from things outside of the game, I usually state my reasoning and the inspiration for the idea. This gives people indicators that allow them to more easily follow my logic from one move to the next, and keeps them from having to catch up with me. Have you done the same?
• Do you feel that your arguments on abolishing the term "powergaming" have been easy to follow? Reading through them again, do you feel that they could lead one into confusion? If someone were to read the sum total of your posts over time, would they easily be able to follow it from one step to the next and onwards?
• How often have you greeted an argument that you disagreed with with an argument that attacked the logic, rather than the structure or subpoints, of the argument?
  
  That's enough for now.

Moskher Heszche wrote:

Moirear Sian wrote:Jealousy is a weakness that may spawn favouritism.

Please elaborate. You've talked about jealousy and favoritism quite a bit but never really got to any core of the argument.

Okay, you claim to know me and have talked to me, but you act like you don't know what I'm talking about?
You Sir, are an... *censored by myself*

Are you saying that it is punished based on favoritism?

Yes.

I would say that it isn't punished at all.

Same here.

I would say that most cases where you could actually pinpoint a punishment, powergaming was only a dash of rulebreaking salt on the big pile of rulebreaking meat.

Which again proves ineffictivity to judge consequently and without prejudice.

Am I jealous of the powergamer's power?

Before I wouldn't have thought so; now I'm sure of it.

Or are they jealous of where I got from pure roleplay? It goes both ways.

Wow, intriguing question. I don't know, but I'd answer that with a 'no'.

The last paragraph of my argument says that. It was more or less thinking out loud. If most of your examples break other rules, what are the rest doing? This is pointing out a weakness in an argument, and not stoking the flames. What you are doing above is merely giving up and being offended where no offense was meant.

Since when you are you a pyschologist?
The ending note of a body of text, book or post in a forum, is the "heaviest portion"; you may agree there.
But what really makes me wonder, is where you get the idea that I wrote in a feeling offended. When Darlok first replied, I felt offended, because of who was writing what he wrote. I was merely pointing out how pathetic your last two posts were, and I did not feel offended. I hope that clarifies some things. Again you prove narrow-mindedness. You believe to know me and it led you to false conclusions.
Must I begin writing like you? In a condescending fashion?
No. I'll just remind you of the term "over-interpretation".
It's most commonly used in reference to people overinterpreting a piece of literature, and assuming what the writer had intended to express with it, while leading into false conclusions that have no real proof behind them.

I never asked to be the brains of the operation. I only asked to play. If I became the representative of the intellect of Illarion, the tinfoil hat-wearing segment of our community is on to something; I'm joining them.

Exactly. But writing an elaborate post as to explain why you don't accept certain people's "style" of playing a computer game as if you were a Demi-God is just pathetic.
It's really a problem about this "community":
"I don't like X's style of playing."
Are some of you aware that when playing a role-playing game, you have to respect various styles and approaches to playing?
Are you aware that so that everybody can enjoy it and have fun, you have to be open-minded enough to tolerate the minor differences that exist?
Are you fake elitists?
Are you aware that rules need to be strict?

What must I do to get an unangry reply from you, Eric? Must I simply agree with you? Could I have a debate once instead of a shouting match? Anything other than a shouting match, please. From now on, let's solve all our disputes with pissing contests.

No comment.

Yes. God forbid that we either: A: Have lives outside of this game. "On the internet. A massive multiplayer online roleplaying game." or B: debate on message boards.

How come people, when writing over the internet, resort so often to mentioning something about having a life? To me that sounds like someone has trouble building up the latter.
And in the post before your last, as your last one, you overgeneralize a group of people and claim to be debating?
That's pathetic, in my eyes.
I first overgeneralized and pointed something positive out about them all. You on the other hand spread false impressions to those who don't know them each individually, by overgeneralizing them in a negative context.

So anyway, I thought about your rhetorical questions, and then I thought about how Estralis recently wrote on the same thread not to attack the people behind characters in the game or behind forum accounts, because most of your "questions" simply repeat the proof of narrow-mindedness, and that you belong to a group of people who believe to know me.
I'm taken to believe you should consider those rhetorical questions yourself, because in circumspect to yourself, they might have more to do with you than they have to do with me. Alone the fact that you went into such elaborate detail and wasted your time with them is somewhat frightening, to say the least.

And still, I rest my case.

You, as in the people, and not you alone, Moskher, make "powergaming" a negative term. Of course, you only use it with people you don't like, obviously.

On a final note, you're the one who told me that you, "felt guilty of having powergamed as Uri Vandos", and that's why you began playing Moskher Hezche, the complete opposite, anti-powergaming character.



Should I applaud you or laugh at you? Because I don't feel offended, more likely I feel amused.

Edit: As for myself, and for the people who don't know me, I did not "powergame" on this game, and probably never will; I always perceived these nine yards more as a poetical exercise, despite not being anywhere close to a poet. To enjoy clicking around and seeing flashy graphics dash around on my screen, I just--simply put--play other games than Illarion, because the only game that confronts me with the abysses and dark recesses of human nature (outside of the roleplaying game, mind you), is Illarion.

Eric,

I have talked to you, but you've never fully expressed your point. Even parts that I do understand could be easily misunderstood by the vast majority of people and this is exactly why this topic swerves off the moment it is born again.

Could you, for example, explain the following?

Are you saying that it is punished based on favoritism?

Yes.

I would say that it isn't punished at all.

Same here.

Further, please explain how you came to point B from point A in the following piece.

I would say that most cases where you could actually pinpoint a punishment, powergaming was only a dash of rulebreaking salt on the big pile of rulebreaking meat.

Which again proves ineffictivity to judge consequently and without prejudice.

A lack of judgement universally doesn't make predjudice apparent to me. Perhaps you believe in some bizarre version of predjudice in which everyone is treated equally, albeit in one unique case.

You don't see arrests for illegal nickle-and-dime bets in the United States not because the cops don't know illegal gambling when they see it, but because it is so minor and widespread as to be laughable.

As for the question, "Am I jealous of the powergamer's power? Or are they jealous of where I got with pure roleplay?" You seemed to miss the point. Remember that I've never roleplayed my ass off to become a great warrior, but they sure as hell have powergamed their asses off to kill my characters. It was used as an example to retort against something you had said earlier, but once again ignore the context.

Also, I would agree that the last paragraph of certain texts, such as essays, is where the weight of the article should lead, but we're on a message board where text is moved and shifted about at the speed of light. More often, the format is based around replying to what has been said before in the order that it was written for the sake of clarity.

But what really makes me wonder, is where you get the idea that I wrote in a feeling offended. When Darlok first replied, I felt offended, because of who was writing what he wrote. I was merely pointing out how pathetic your last two posts were, and I did not feel offended. I hope that clarifies some things.

Eric, why do I feel that you got offended? Read the above several times over. In every post where I disagree with you, I get absolute hate like this piece of work. In every case that I have witnessed someone else disagreeing with you, it is the same. This is a bad habit. I'm trying my hardest to be reasonable, but it's not coming any easier over time.

Here are the answers to your questions, and I will keep them concise:

Are some of you aware that when playing a role-playing game, you have to respect various styles and approaches to playing?

Yes. Which is exactly why I will never support play that is disruptive. This is another example of looking at an issue entirely one-sided.

Are you aware that everbody can enjoy it and have fun, you have to be open-minded enough to tolerate the minor differences that exist?

Yes. Absolutely--until those differences are disruptive and shoot down everyone else's differences offhand.

Are you fake elitists?

What are you trying for, Eric? You will argue day and night that we should respect powergaming, but you can't even respect someone disagreeing with you?

Are you aware that rules need to be strict?

No. Rather I'm aware that rules should be open, able to be viewed by the playing public, and easily understood.

So anyway, I thought about your rhetorical questions, and then I thought about how Estralis recently wrote on the same thread not to attack the people behind characters in the game or behind forum accounts, because most of your "questions" simply repeat the proof of narrow-mindedness, and that you belong to a group of people who believe to know me.

Hello again, hypocrisy.

On a final note, you're the one who told me that you, "felt guilty of having powergamed as Uri Vandos", and that's why you began playing Moskher Hezche, the complete opposite, anti-powergaming character.



Should I applaud you or laugh at you? Because I don't feel offended, more likely I feel amused.

Edit: As for myself, and for the people who don't know me, I did not "powergame" on this game, and probably never will;

Wow. This is a whole new level that has crossed the border of personal for many reasons. Eric, I have explained what lead to my change of view, oh, twelve months ago now. Could you explain to me what lead to your change of view mere weeks ago?

You're trying to make me look like I'm out to punish powergamers, and I've explained my view on this to you more than anyone else. I have said, time and time yet again, that punishing powergaming isn't a matter of bans, it's a matter of leading by example and conversation. Let's get this correct:

You were the one who started the hooplah over the evil powergamers, which led to a certain amount of your targets leaving.

You then flipped sides and started this thread to defend them.

Who are you defending them from, Eric? Yourself? No one else had the energy to talk about powergaming so long. Is this how you go about abandoning the word altogether?

Moskher Hezche wrote:In every case that I have witnessed someone else disagreeing with you, it is the same. This is a bad habit.

What I quoted up there of yours is not a complete lie, but it's a lie, and you very well know it. I'm disappointed with you. You were one of the few reasons I still kept coming back to this piece of crap game, and I suppose I'm putting one more etch into the markings.

Mitch, this is simply obscene what you're doing. Please review how long your post is. I don't have the time nor energy to put up with all your nonsense, so I'll focus on the meat of it and what's on-topic.

First quote you made is simple to explain. It may look like hypocrisy on my behalf, but think about it. Think REALLY hard about it. I need not elaborate, the case stands clear right here in this thread. We have more than enough over-favored players (sorry, but names like Aragon, Darlok, John Irenicus, Elminister, they all go break the naming rules if you ask me, and it's pretty sad*). We also have more than enough players who have done "powergaming" WITHOUT being disruptive, as you're playing onto, and of course they get away with it. I hope that explains it a bit better, smarty-pants.

* EDIT: Those names, I find disruptive. Darlok is the name of a race from Master of Orion. John Irenicus an evil elf, and Elminster a mage, both from the AD&D setting of Forgotten Realms. Aragorn is a popular LotR figure. I find all these names disruptive to my role-playing, because it's not THAT far away from meeting an orc named Luke Skywalker.

To those whom it concerns and read this: YOU ARE FAKES.

Get real.

Let me move on.

Mitch, if you base your argumentation on "powergaming" being a synonym for disruptive, you're missing the point, as usual. Narrow-minded.

Also, you should get off your high horse: Just because I'm not being friendly on a topic where we don't agree does not equal hate. You are sick if you keep overinterpreting what I write, like you're doing here.

Plus: I don't understand what you're getting at by pointing out how I change my mind over a short time, while you say you do the same over months away. Humans change, things change, opinions change. I suppose though I'm less narrow-minded than you if I can change my opinions on the TERM "powergaming" over weeks while it takes you 12 months. So, I repeat myself, get real.

While you go about pointing out my hypocrisy, it's funny how I replied lengthily, then read on off-topic you'd be away from the forum for about a week, and then see a post from you the next day, but, whatever.

Moskher Hezche wrote:You were the one who started the hooplah over the evil powergamers, which led to a certain amount of your targets leaving.

You then flipped sides and started this thread to defend them.

EDIT: "a certain amount of my targets"? Two people of whom I play a different game with now? "Targets"? Are you crazy? The only person I feel I've "slimed out" of the game, as you seem to make me here, is Dyluck, who I truly and viciously offended. And guess what-- that was unrelated of powergaming, and by now I'm beginning to regret I did so, because I actually was sorta fond of the guy and wish I had a go at playing any random game with him.
"Hooplah"? Me started it?
What about SVST, and its usage of pointing out "disruptive players"? Are you serious? *I* started that? No Sir, you very well know I did not. I followed the rules. I am strict, cold-blooded, and I don't give a good God dam' about many things, but I follow rules. I'd like to remind you of how lengthily you all described how "disruptive" the character Karmane was to the game. That was before my time on SVST, and if for some strange reason you don't believe me, you may go look up on the posting dates.

"Flipped sides"? Do you read what you write? There, penned from your own words, is the verbal proof backing up my point that this "community" is ridiculously divided. I repeat: DIVIDED. I don't see anybody else here making efforts to close such divisions, and this stupid powergaming "rule", which isn't even one really, would be one of the sources of gaps that exists.

Moskher Hezche wrote:Remember that I've never roleplayed my ass off to become a great warrior, but they sure as hell have powergamed their asses off to kill my characters.

Are we still talking about the same player "community" that's currently playing the game, or aforementioned "community" of the past five months? I believe neither the former nor the latter, because I have yet to see someone set up an army of "PGed" player characters just to HUNT your *sob sob* "un-powergamed" player characters down and exterminate them. If you're trying to hold a sermon, yes, I'm missing your point.

While we're at it, who are YOU to judge who is a disruptive player or not? All you can judge is who is disruptive to YOU and that's where opinions go different ways. But of course, this you won't accept, and you blame me of getting offensive when someone doesn't agree with me. Fine. Go screw yourself.

You say I'm simply putting you down for disagreeing. Hello?

I think you're doing exactly the same thing, Mister. Think about the point I'm getting at. I'll make it really clear for you, so you don't go twisting my thoughts and words around, and finally get back on-topic, dear Mitch:

THE WORD POWERGAMING IS OBSOLETE. IT'S AN OLD FOSSIL THAT HAS BEEN DEPRIVED OF MEANING. IF IT CONTINUES TO EXIST, HYPOCRISY AMONG THIS COMMUNITY CONTINUES TO EXIST, AND SO DOES A WRITTEN INVITATION FOR ANOTHER RULE TO BE POSSIBLY BROKEN.

That's my current opinion. Is that clear enough? Or need I retype it without the caps lock in a seperate post--so you manage to stay on topic without going into lengths of trying to insult me?

To the names discussion:

Moirear seems to be something like a title of nobility. (Why isn't that forbidden?).

Cassandra Fjurin... hmmm Fjury wasn't that a name of a horse in the TV?
We also have a Fedaykin, a Galdriel.

When i really want it, i would find to the most of the names another meaning.

Indeed it is, Cassandra, you're quite sharp.

It means "Lord".

Funny though that I had my name edited and reduced to "Sian" alone.

Sian

it isn't ment bad, its only to show you that i can find to the most names another meaning which won't fit in a medival world. Ok the Orc names are really difficult. In my case i have a few characters where i noticed later that the names also have another meaning. I see nothing bad in it. It shouldn't be to obviously. I don't wan't a luke skywalker. But luke is a normal name. And i find Darlok is fitting in the medival world. The same is with Aragon. And as far as i know this is a true name like John or Steve but i don't know from which language it is from.

Blame me...

My name is about to be changed, just wait a few more weeks.

I know I'm going to regret this but......

Sian I believe I share your opinion on what you've said about power gaming, but I have to agree that your posts do seem overly aggressive sometimes. I know from reading your posts it's because you feel very strongly about the subject but it would be better if you could discuss the topic as objectively as possible.

You wont find a meaning for Nilo!

The name filter is too strict right now I think. I don't want to see a Luke Skywalker either, but I wouldn't mind seeing Sian, or any other name that has been used. I think John's name is fine. Who cares if it is another video game, it sounds perfectly fine.

My name is full of meanings:

Racker (german) - young male person who's behavior isn't good (hard to explain)
Ich rackere mich ab - (sich ab-)rackern (german) - (to) work hard
raquer (french) - (to) pay
rack (english)
to be racked (by) (english)
to rack one's brain (english)
ich kehre - kehren (german) - (to) sweep

Diplom (german) - diploma
diplomat (english)
maitre/mâitre (not sure) (french) - master (I think so)
mate (english)
Oma (german) - grandma

etc.

i think we are going the wrong way here.. i dont think sian has anything against names that are having a different meaning..
when it comes to making up a name for a human character it gets really difficult to move around that.. i think what sian was up to were commonly known fantasy characters from other realms.. at least all he mentioned but darlok are..

i myself am pretty open minded when it comes to names.. but i have to agree that such commonly know characters as elminster, aragorn, galadriel and consorts are pretty bad choices when it comes to names.. it makes one automaticly imagine the character before even knowing him.. but thats just me..
names from different genres as darlok for example are ok with me.. i play master of orion every other week and i only realised today, when sian pointed it out, that darlok was one of the races.. it was so out of the context i failed to realise it

on the powergaming topic i dont really have an opinion to be honest..

I am far to new to have a real opinion on power gaming with in illarion. having not even logged into the game yet.
However power gaming is so universal and doesn't always even have to do with stats. We have all expierenced the sort of power gaming were you sneak up behind some one stick a knife to his throat,
X:grabs your wrist forceing knife from your grip and rolls.
me:fires the crossbow I had in left hand "that was pokeing in your back if you had let me finish sentence"
X:back flips our of way landing on knees.
Me:draws sword with free hand and slashes down towards your head.
X: catches blade between his palms....
and so it goes 20 minutes later I walk away bleeding vowing never to fight with one of the immortals again.

The same can be said for stats, When my character arrives in Illarion it will be high on my priortys to get his skills up with a long sword. My character would never wear anything heavier than chain mail, or use a shiled "unless one was picked up in desperation". He has however had a lot of expierence and training with a long sword. So to get that skill up at speed serves the purpose of making my character who he is.
By the same token he has in the past worked with wood so I may choose to work as a lumber jack and eventuall carpenter. Leveling those stats up at speed has really served one purpose brining my character into the present.As such to me not powergameing.
If I suddenly decide that a great axe does far more damage so I better level that up and while im at start wearing platemail. I have officically gone into power gaming...an action thats sole purpose is to make my pixel bigger and badder for no purpose other than being able to pk bigger characters or kill bigger monsters.
By the same token decideing there is more money in gem stones or smithing and becomeing a master at the craft in 4 days is utter crap!.
My character may well change profession or learn to fight with two weapons as he emerges and changes in the world...if that occurs though it must be a slow process RPed between a mentor and teacher...
I have propably repeated a lot of peoples thoughts,
But the end point is does it make logical sense for your character to be doing this for hours on end...or is it something you are doing to complete your character. Any ones character who is allready a master of 15 skills propably needs to look at why they are playing any how.
Pendar/Brian

As much as I understand the eagerness of new players to try out things (I have been a newbie myself eons ago), be careful not to step too far.

Pendar wrote:Leveling those stats up at speed has really served one purpose brining my character into the present.As such to me not powergameing.

To me it is, and if you read again what you have written you maybe understand why.
Powergaming here is generaly considered to raise skills without roleplaying.
So when you say, that your push up the skills of your character because your character should have had these skills from the beginning cause of his personal experiances in his past, then its powergaming.

Why are you smithing that much longswords?
-Because I should have known how to smith them years ago.

I have written this in earlier posts.
Raising skills now, because I decided that my character has learned this profession in his (pre-Illarion) past is simply not justifyable with roleplaying.
You are in a dilema, you are teaching your character things you already set as known for him, so you lose your roleplaying-secrurity-net.

Your abilities in roleplaying show themself when you find good a work-arround for this problem.
Or you just take the easy way and dont let your character have done jobs like carpenter, smith or such in his past.

Think about it, maybe you see it the same way as me.

Darlok wrote:Your abilities in roleplaying show themself when you find good a work-arround for this problem.

Name some solid examples, please.

Just don't forget:

Darlok wrote:Powergaming here is generaly considered to raise skills without roleplaying.

*cough* I exempt myself from being counted into the general consensus.

Or wait--maybe you should firsthand define "roleplaying" in a single paragraph.
Or no, scrap that one, ironically, it's the oh-so-secret answer to the account acceptance question #1!

Moirear Sian wrote:Name some solid examples, please.

I can't.
I never found examples to avoid this paradoxon.
So I tried to show a problem I see.
Pther may see the same problem too and I said that they are great players if they find a work arround for this problem.
Seems you didn't understand what I actually wanted to say, sorry 'bout that.

Moirear Sian wrote:*cough* I exempt myself from being counted into the general consensus.

Minorities are mostly not included in the general opinion.
But who said I speak for everyone and his dog here ?
I am mainly speaking for myself and my very own opinion, and sometimes I state that I tend to belive that others may share my opinion.
Don't take it too personal.

Moirear Sian wrote:Or wait--maybe you should firsthand define "roleplaying" in a single paragraph.
Or no, scrap that one, ironically, it's the oh-so-secret answer to the account acceptance question #1!

Thats perfectly right !:D
I actualy dont have to, because everyone who has an Account showed that he has at least a clue what roleplaying is.
You actualy said yourself, that you believe we only have good roleplayers arround in Illarion.

So have a great new year Sian, and calm from your personal crusade my friend.
Take another nip from some sparkling wine and enjoy this time of the year, even if its coverd from sad news from all arround the world.

See you ingame (if we recognize each other).
Happy new year everyone !

Solid example:

Bluff

Bluff your ass out of anything



For Example:

Sean Elaski, has...like...no skills...

So, he claims to be a tailor....finds some "Friends" and buys clothes, for half price (which he turns around, and sells for full price)

He also claims to be a good fighter, to back this...why, he uses bluffing.

He stood stone faced in front of Grant and bluffed

Insulted Darlok in his own castle (that was fun...)



You dont get more worked around then that, when the letters arent even a classfiable shade of red





Of course now hes less of a vegabond, and more like a good guy.....and has skills...but that was just an example

Pendar wrote: <snip>
By the same token he has in the past worked with wood so I may choose to work as a lumber jack and eventuall carpenter. Leveling those stats up at speed has really served one purpose brining my character into the present.As such to me not powergameing.
<snip>
Pendar/Brian

It is impossible to "PG lumberjacking" - save the only chance you might want to be jailed or killed (over and over, probably) for hacking and slashing down an entire forest. Many people take the sight of a forest of stumps to be highly... irritating.

I wholely agree with Darlok, it is powergaming no matter what. "My char is supposed to have done this" crap isn't cutting it anymore. Playing a character like this is first of all volitile to your roleplay because you do not start with skill. Simply play a character with no previous experience and you will not have to "speedily" gain skill. I played a character who ran away from home and is now quite accomplished. Sure I made up some silly rp excuses for skills, but having abnormal skills is not against the rules mind you. The rate at which you gain them however can be.

First of all, you will find "powergaming" in no single English dictionary I know of.

Gro'bul wrote:"My char is supposed to have done this" crap isn't cutting it anymore.

I don't get it--this is where nobody is naming me any sound arguments as to why it's not cutting it anymore. Why is it not cutting it anymore?

I'd like to inform you that nearly every RPG I played, be it computerized, be it P&P, be it multi-player, or be it single-player, you DO start with some basic skills or abilities. Illarion is the exotic here.

Following the thought: During character creation you are informed nowhere that you begin at zero skills/abilities. And then you have to wait for account approval. So what does an eager role-player do in this stretch of time, this rp-nirvana? The answer is simple, they think up the entire personality and background of their upcoming first character, and this will undoubtedly predefine how they plan on playing out the character--among other things, how they are going to make this character believable in the sense of a system that conducts the role-playing (in this case, the Illarion-client).

In other words, following the argumentation that someone absolutely must not "bring up their skills to par with their character concept", this means that everybody working on SBS is a powergamer--if an SBS-driven-quest needs a character with a specific skill--what happens? Does a GM just grant a certain skill level to the character in question and modify the character appropriately? Or do they have to sit in game and make their index finger melt from all the silly clicking to up a skill to a decent, useable level? I do not know. Maybe! Maybe not. I do not really care, either.

What I do care about, is this irritating tidbit:

having abnormal skills is not against the rules mind you. The rate at which you gain them however can be.

How exactly is this rate determined?
Overall online-time compared to skill gain?
Observation through players?
Personal dislikes?

Following through the thoughts again, what rate is not against the rules, and what rate or amount of roleplay does one have to put into play to justify the skill gain as well-played?

Furthermore, the argumentation of a character being ambitious and therefore over-strenuating themselves and "gaining speedily" was shot down several times--why?

The little I've heard of the next client and the introduction of certain "gain-caps", more-effectivity-for-skill, smoother learning curves; that all, plus the people currently playing it not being "powergamers", and the account approval system supposedly filtering some of "them" out right off the bat--how should one POSSIBLY powergame in the future?

And on a final, enigmatic note: Isn't the explicit naming of a rule an invitation to break it as well in the first place?

Moirear Sian wrote:In other words, following the argumentation that someone absolutely must not "bring up their skills to par with their character concept", this means that everybody working on SBS is a powergamer--if an SBS-driven-quest needs a character with a specific skill--what happens? Does a GM just grant a certain skill level to the character in question and modify the character appropriately? Or do they have to sit in game and make their index finger melt from all the silly clicking to up a skill to a decent, useable level? I do not know. Maybe! Maybe not. I do not really care, either.

Why do you think every quest they do does not require a specific skill from their char? Because they do not like to be called PGers?

As too my, first, post in this entire thread I believe, I just wish to say, that no one can define PGing (as has been said over and over again, I know). So please stop trying. If the GMs need a definition from you, they would surely ask.
As to the point about having zero skills...maybe it should be mentioned somewhere. At the manual it is mentioned I think. Maybe make the client a bit different, as to, changing the starting message, I don't know. In my point of view, it could also have paragraphs, so it is easier to read(yes, paragraphs do make posts easier to read ). But this belongs in the proposal forum.
I think this is all I wished to say for now, if you have critic, please post it in a non-sarcastic, non-degrading manner.

Lysu Davanum AKA Erik

Lysu Davanum wrote:

Moirear Sian wrote:In other words, following the argumentation that someone absolutely must not "bring up their skills to par with their character concept", this means that everybody working on SBS is a powergamer--if an SBS-driven-quest needs a character with a specific skill--what happens? Does a GM just grant a certain skill level to the character in question and modify the character appropriately? Or do they have to sit in game and make their index finger melt from all the silly clicking to up a skill to a decent, useable level? I do not know. Maybe! Maybe not. I do not really care, either.

Why do you think every quest they do does not require a specific skill from their char? Because they do not like to be called PGers?

While we're at the silent protests and off-topic complaints on this thread, my chars were never good enough for quests in general. Sian used to suck miserably. Mostly at things he was supposed to be good in, like fighting.
(And it took five months till he was useful with anything but lumberjacking, which was at the highest level I believe because he hacked down about 2000 wood in the first month, on request from older characters recognizing him as new.)

Seriously, where does the powergaming begin? Is it just the over-sensation of false achievement placed within a computer game and someone spending their real life time clicking on the same tile one hundred times, or is it an even simpler equation—the equation of demand and availability?

I'm tempted to vouch for the latter.

I Think you've hit the nail on the head Lysu. Powergaming cannot be defined properly. Since it cannot be defined should there be a rule against it? If it cannot be defined, if no limit can be set, then it is down to a judge to decide. Is the judge as impartial as they need to be? How does the player know when the line has been crossed? It leads to an underlining sense of fear to those who want to play "properly". Is this why there are often only 2 or 3 players on at a time? People log on, no one to RP with, don't want to cross the invisible PG line so log off. Next person logs on and the same happens. If people have a reason to hang about then that's one more to RP with.

I personally don't have a problem with powergamers. If you want to spend all your time online beefing up your character it's nothing to me. As long as you RP with anyone who shows up then fairplay I say.

As has been said, all the players are deemed to be "proper" Role Players by the entrance exam. So what is the problem?

If you are female, let's get married, Sam.

But to return to the serious tracks again: exactly my thoughts.

Sam wrote:It leads to an underlining sense of fear to those who want to play "properly". Is this why there are often only 2 or 3 players on at a time? People log on, no one to RP with, don't want to cross the invisible PG line so log off. Next person logs on and the same happens. If people have a reason to hang about then that's one more to RP with.

That's it! That's the problem I'm trying to get to! Raah!

Here, an acute example of the problem:
I start a new character, a cuddly, fun-loving elfess bard. She wants to pick a flower -- oh my gosh -- a flower! I shift-click the patch ten times -- "Your hands muckrake through mud, but you find nothing". Every time. And I try it another twenty-five times. Still nothing else happens. I try to pick a single dam' flower, but still none is showing up. Some time, I'm sure I've done it one hundred times in a row, and wow! a skill has popped up in a deep black shade of red on her skill-list, but hey -- still no flower.

Result?

I log out, frustrated, and don't feel like playing for the following weeks. Why? I was TRYING to roleplay, but I couldn't do what I had in mind, because the client forced me to PG some silly skill up just so I could pick a single dam' flower. And I refused to do the PG part, and at the same time, don't feel like moving into a semi-transparent zone of breaking rules--because at what point will someone start calling me a PGer?

I'd say that very moment is exactly whenever someone notices the character is gaining an advantage over their own, perhaps expressed through a slightly higher skill, or significantly higher skill (given the character acquires this ability faster than others, who then, frustrated themselves, point this out). But of course I wouldn't be called a PGer if I'd manage to sneak somewhere on the map, PG the related skill to a level where I could pick a flower, and then return for the RP -- nobody would notice. Until of course they notice other advantages that might just pop up alongside of some silly skill rating (i.e., my character selling better items from the same trade in the shop; better than their own characters, mind you).

Sure, I could just "#me my way through it", and hand out an "invisible" flower, only noteable through a #me, but for one, I think that's totally fake, and another, not exactly in the sense of the #me's.

If you were pg'ing you would probobly receive a warning from gm's mind you. They are incedibly forgiving in my opinion, but its not my decision. And accually powergaming could be difined by an exact equation, the developers would just have to figure out what attributes and how much skill you have effects this. Example: (S+W/2+D/3+I)-C=T, or your strength+willpower/2+dexterity/3+intelligence-craft = amount of TIME your character can work at that certain craft before needing rest. Certain crafts would be harder to work at, so you would be able to work less than a less physically demanding craft. There would have to be different equations for each craft because different crafts demand different attribute proficiencies. Hopefully if they don't implement a "cap" with these equations, they will publish them as guidelines. That is of course if they haven't already.

9. Powergaming

Carrying out an action repeatedly, and for an extended time to raise your skill, is called Power gaming, and is forbidden. A worse case is when the player is doing something else to entertain him/her self meanwhile (e.g. watching tv). Note: Casting offensive spells on yourself will kill you instantly.

Powergaming is not in the dictionary, although it is defined on the website game rules page, which everyone is advised to read before playing the game.

If you repeatedly do something to gain skill then you are powergaming.

the english rule doesn't fit with the german one. In the german language version there is the little addition "if it doesn't fit into the role".

So a fighter who trains to get better is no powergamer. Not with the german version of the rule, but after the english rule he would be a powergamer, because he does something to get better, to train skill.

Same with a smith who does his work and smithes items to be a better smith one day.

so the right expression should be:

If you repeatedly do something to gain skill and if it doesn't fit into your role then you are powergaming.